Jump to content

Updates to general handbook


Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Originally they were there so the bishop knew how to counsel people who asked about them. Now that it is generally available it is a good place to put general church positions on things.

The problem is that every time the church takes a position on something controversial it ends up being divisive. Why not stay out of the fray and instead counsel people to act like grownups and make their own decisions?

Link to comment
13 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

Vaccines are obvious because infection impacts those who meet and gather. 

Sterilisations, not so clear why they are referenced.

I get why they would say this about vaccines, but doctrinally the sterilization has a stronger reason for being there.  

Though I'm also of the mind that adults should just make it a matter of prayer and leave church leaders out of it.

Link to comment
2 hours ago, JarMan said:

Why doesn’t the church adopt the stance they have on birth control?-which is essentially that adults ought to make their own decisions on such matters.

They do. The surgical sterilisation bit is in the birth control section.

Quote

The Church discourages surgical sterilization as an elective form of birth control. Surgical sterilization includes procedures such as vasectomies and tubal ligations. However, this decision is a personal matter that is ultimately left to the judgment and prayerful consideration of the husband and wife. Couples should counsel together in unity and seek the confirmation of the Spirit in making this decision.

 

Link to comment
18 minutes ago, JustAnAustralian said:

They do. The surgical sterilisation bit is in the birth control section.

 

It looks like they have updated the section on surgical sterilization since I last read it and moved their position closer to the general position on birth control. But still, they "discourage" it. Why? How is it even any of their business? And why would a member think they need the opinion of a church leader on this subject in the first place?

Link to comment
51 minutes ago, Rain said:

I get why they would say this about vaccines, but doctrinally the sterilization has a stronger reason for being there.  

Though I'm also of the mind that adults should just make it a matter of prayer and leave church leaders out of it.

What is the stronger reason for sterilisation?

Link to comment
34 minutes ago, JarMan said:

And why would a member think they need the opinion of a church leader on this subject in the first place?

Because of the whole be fruitful and multiply thing. Surgical sterilisation is a lot harder to undo than just taking a pill, wearing a condom, having an IUD, or implanted slow-release contraceptive.

Link to comment
10 hours ago, The Nehor said:

“There has been a great difficulty in getting anything into the heads of this generation. It has been like splitting hemlock knots with a corn-dodger for a wedge, and a pumpkin for a beetle. Even the Saints are slow to understand.”

Maybe this generation will do better though.

Consider the hypothetical case of a faithful but somewhat naive and gullible member of the Church who has recently been troubled and agitated at, say, a family reunion by the rantings from a relative who is a prepper fanatic. Don’t you think said Church member could easily be assured and set straight when shown the relevant entry in the Church Handbook, even if the entry is not sufficient to sway the prepper himself? 

So I say that even though the caution in the handbook might not influence everyone who should be influenced thereby, I’m confident it will reach some folks, perhaps a good many. 

Edited by Scott Lloyd
Link to comment
1 hour ago, JustAnAustralian said:

Because of the whole be fruitful and multiply thing. Surgical sterilisation is a lot harder to undo than just taking a pill, wearing a condom, having an IUD, or implanted slow-release contraceptive.

I can’t cite chapter and verse on this, just my own opinion, but I get a very dark and uncomfortable feeling about the notion of such an invasive and clumsy tampering with the divinely created means for reproduction. YMMV. 
 

Furthermore, I believe there were a great many couples who were not even bothering to consider whether the Church leaders had any guidance to offer on the matter. Having it in the handbook for all to see tends to leave us without excuse. 

Link to comment
9 hours ago, Calm said:

True, but do you really want to have neighbors who are drunk and armed? 

I suppose you're referring to those who stockpile both alcohol and ammunition as potential trade goods? I'm not entirely sure how to take your question.

Not to get into a gun-rights debate, do you realize how well-armed individual Americans actually are, as a general rule? Especially in the West and South? As an adult, I've always assumed that my neighbors are armed, at least in the western states, and as for getting drunk, doesn't every non-LDS person get at least tipsy once in awhile? I'd be willing to bet that the majority of people who are drunk at any given moment, do own firearms. This doesn't worry me.

Many years ago my wife and I went out with two other couples to a local pizza eatery. As we sat there, eating and chatting, it suddenly occurred to me that every single one of us had concealed pistol licenses, and knowing them as I did, we were all probably carrying. I certainly was, as was my wife. I then asked "So, how many of you are exercising your rights, right now.? They all smiled, knowing what I meant, and I got confirmation from three of the others. One's wife said she wasn't at that moment. So, out of the six of us, only one wasn't armed. All of us being practicing LDS, of course, none of us was drinking, let alone drunk. Around the same time-frame, our Elders Quorum held a "Saturday Shoot-out" at a local disused gravel pit, and a couple dozen men and women showed up with every legal firearm imaginable and filled the air with a "joyful noise". It was tons of fun!

In Washington state, one out of every 20 residents has a concealed carry permit (and that's accounting for children, so the adult permit rate is even higher). In Utah it's even better; I think the number I heard was one out of seven. And not all those permit holders are non-drinkers.

So if you live in Utah (or where are there dragons, anyway?), you have armed drunks everywhere. 

 

Link to comment
7 hours ago, JarMan said:

It looks like they have updated the section on surgical sterilization since I last read it and moved their position closer to the general position on birth control. But still, they "discourage" it. Why? How is it even any of their business? And why would a member think they need the opinion of a church leader on this subject in the first place?

Twice a year (this weekend in fact), Church leaders gather the entire church in a huge virtual meeting and give the membership all kinds of advice on many different matters, including but not limited to how we all treat each other. Why? How is it even any of their business? If I want to treat my wife, say, derisively and call her fat or skinny, or she needs to color her hair because I prefer blondes, why should the Church think it's any of their affair?  If I want to rob a bank, that's between me and the bank -- why should the Church push its way into my private business with my bank?

I once knew of a man who, in priesthood meeting, objected to the principle of the lesson being taught, which was to reduce contention in the home. He claimed that having contention in the home prepared his children for the rough and tumble of real life, and that molly-coddling one's children was to make them ill-equipped to deal with the real world. Besides, what business is it of the Church to tell us how to raise our children?

Come on, man, get serious.

In case you missed the curve, churches aren't just social clubs or places of entertainment. They are supposed to teach correct principles and encourage their members to live up to them. It's not the Church's job to make people feel good about themselves; it's to make people want to improve themselves and to obey God's commandments. This isn't done by keeping silent on what correct behavior is.  

Edited by Stargazer
Link to comment
10 hours ago, JarMan said:

The problem is that every time the church takes a position on something controversial it ends up being divisive. Why not stay out of the fray and instead counsel people to act like grownups and make their own decisions?

Seriously. On a reddit forum it was as though people couldnt get to the top Rameumpton fast enough to pronounce that if you do not get vaccinated you do not love Jesus etc

Edited by provoman
Link to comment
7 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

What is the stronger reason for sterilisation?

All off us living in the premortal life, needing to come to earth and our missions here.  

I'm not saying really that one is more important.  I was just kind of surprised that you didn't see the reasoning right away from our doctrine.  

Link to comment
7 hours ago, JarMan said:

It looks like they have updated the section on surgical sterilization since I last read it and moved their position closer to the general position on birth control. But still, they "discourage" it. Why? How is it even any of their business? And why would a member think they need the opinion of a church leader on this subject in the first place?

They discourage it because it is harder to change back.

And why do members think that?  I have no idea. It never even occurred to me me before - my husband and I were prayerful about it and did it before I heard, but I have heard quite a few who have wondered. All women and most online, but not all.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, provoman said:

Seriously. On a reddit forum it was as though people couldnt get to the top Rameumpton fast enough to pronounce that if you do not get vaccinated you do not love Jesus etc

Well, it's reddit. Holding other people up to one's own particular standard of truth and justice is somewhat of the standard operating procedure for every darned subreddit in existence, isn't it? 

Link to comment
2 hours ago, Stargazer said:

I suppose you're referring to those who stockpile both alcohol and ammunition as potential trade goods? I'm not entirely sure how to take your question.

Not to get into a gun-rights debate, do you realize how well-armed individual Americans actually are, as a general rule? Especially in the West and South? As an adult, I've always assumed that my neighbors are armed, at least in the western states, and as for getting drunk, doesn't every non-LDS person get at least tipsy once in awhile? I'd be willing to bet that the majority of people who are drunk at any given moment, do own firearms. This doesn't worry me.

Many years ago my wife and I went out with two other couples to a local pizza eatery. As we sat there, eating and chatting, it suddenly occurred to me that every single one of us had concealed pistol licenses, and knowing them as I did, we were all probably carrying. I certainly was, as was my wife. I then asked "So, how many of you are exercising your rights, right now.? They all smiled, knowing what I meant, and I got confirmation from three of the others. One's wife said she wasn't at that moment. So, out of the six of us, only one wasn't armed. All of us being practicing LDS, of course, none of us was drinking, let alone drunk. Around the same time-frame, our Elders Quorum held a "Saturday Shoot-out" at a local disused gravel pit, and a couple dozen men and women showed up with every legal firearm imaginable and filled the air with a "joyful noise". It was tons of fun!

In Washington state, one out of every 20 residents has a concealed carry permit (and that's accounting for children, so the adult permit rate is even higher). In Utah it's even better; I think the number I heard was one out of seven. And not all those permit holders are non-drinkers.

So if you live in Utah (or where are there dragons, anyway?), you have armed drunks everywhere. 

 

Who are you people!?! ;)

My husband and I don't have permits, he wants one and I don't want him carrying. He has a couple of deer hunting rifles and that's it. 

But his brothers on the other hand have many weapons probably a little on the prepper side. I remember vacuuming my MIL's home and seeing a rifle behind their bedroom door. And thinking, whoa, what if my children had found that while playing at their house. Don't know if it was loaded, but thinking it was.

And then on FB I'm constantly seeing my BIL and his sons with their assault weapons and shooting up a storm out in the desert or wherever it's legal. 

So I might be bad, but that's the fear I have of guns I guess. I think more people are killed with them, because of accidents or someone that wants to end their life or in the heat of desperation they'll be able to but w/o that ready and accessible gun it probably wouldn't have happened. And then when kids find guns. 

But to each their own. 

Edited by Tacenda
Link to comment
1 hour ago, Rain said:

All off us living in the premortal life, needing to come to earth and our missions here.  

I'm not saying really that one is more important.  I was just kind of surprised that you didn't see the reasoning right away from our doctrine.  

 I guess. To me it's kinda big jump because I do not equate sterilisation with childlessness. But thanks for clarifying!

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

Who are you people!?! ;)

My husband and I don't have permits, he wants one and I don't want him carrying. He has a couple of deer hunting rifles and that's it. 

But his brothers on the other hand have many weapons probably a little on the prepper side. I remember vacuuming my MIL's home and seeing a rifle behind their bedroom door. And thinking, whoa, what if my children had found that while playing at their house. Don't know if it was loaded, but thinking it was.

And then on FB I'm constantly seeing my BIL and his sons with their assault weapons and shooting up a storm out in the desert or wherever it's legal. 

So I might be bad, but that's the fear I have of guns I guess. I think more people are killed with them, because of accidents or someone that wants to end their life or in the heat of desperation they'll be able to but w/o that ready and accessible gun it probably wouldn't have happened. And then when kids find guns. 

But to each their own. 

Wait they have assault riffles or do they have guns that just look scary?  Its pretty rare for people to have real assault riffles?

 

All kids should be taught about guns. That they are not toys, what they really do.   My kids know not to touch a gun unless dad or mom is there.  

Link to comment
17 minutes ago, cherryTreez said:

Wait they have assault riffles or do they have guns that just look scary?  Its pretty rare for people to have real assault riffles?

 

All kids should be taught about guns. That they are not toys, what they really do.   My kids know not to touch a gun unless dad or mom is there.  

What even is an assault rifle?  It’s not like that’s an official designation of anything. 

Link to comment
7 hours ago, Calm said:

Only if the Handbook is recommended reading like scripture is. If the Church isn’t telling people to read it, they may not be aware of it.  I am not saying the Church needs to tell people, just saying that it would be a valid excuse Imo. 

Less valid than it would have been before contents of the handbook were made widely accessible via the internet and the Gospel Library app — and that increased accessibility was prominently publicized. 

And on the other side of the coin, the presence of the counsel in the handbook gives validation to folks like me who already had a creepy feeling from the idea of surgical sterilization for convenience’s sake but didn’t feel like they could cite chapter and verse to bolster  their inherent intuition. 

Edited by Scott Lloyd
Link to comment
2 hours ago, Tacenda said:

Who are you people!?! ;)

Well, I'm just some guy, you know! 😄 I've known plenty of people who are well-armed. We're pretty normal.  In some senses, anyway.

2 hours ago, Tacenda said:

My husband and I don't have permits, he wants one and I don't want him carrying. He has a couple of deer hunting rifles and that's it. 

Deer hunting rifles are great for hunting deer, but not so good for home defense. I suggest a shotgun. Even Joe Biden agrees with me:

2 hours ago, Tacenda said:

But his brothers on the other hand have many weapons probably a little on the prepper side. I remember vacuuming my MIL's home and seeing a rifle behind their bedroom door. And thinking, whoa, what if my children had found that while playing at their house. Don't know if it was loaded, but thinking it was.

And then on FB I'm constantly seeing my BIL and his sons with their assault weapons and shooting up a storm out in the desert or wherever it's legal. 

So I might be bad, but that's the fear I have of guns I guess. I think more people are killed with them, because of accidents or someone that wants to end their life or in the heat of desperation they'll be able to but w/o that ready and accessible gun it probably wouldn't have happened. And then when kids find guns. 

But to each their own. 

I think this is not the place to get into a big discussion about this subject, so I'll say no more.

 

 

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...